|
Post by bzcat on Apr 27, 2012 14:16:41 GMT -8
Crenshaw is basically fully funded so it will start construction no matter what the NIBMYs say. By the middle of 2013, we will have the following construction going on: 1. Expo 2 bridges (Venice/Robertson, National/Palm, Motor, Bundy, Sepulveda) and all stations on the route 2. Foothill stations and rail installation 3. Crenshaw ROW clearing and utility relocation 4. Purple line station box excavation (Fairfax, La Brea, La Cienega) and TBM staging at Wilshire/Crenshaw 5. Downtown Connector TBM excavation in Little Tokyo. 6. Final touch up/testing for Orange Line extension. And we'll probably have the DEIR on South Bay, LAX spur, and Eastside completed. Santa Ana Branch is still a long ways to reality. Doesn't the orange line open in June of this year? Why would it still be testing in 2013? I got 2012 and 2013 confused ;D You are right, Orange line will be open by middle of next year.
|
|
|
Post by WhiteCity on May 15, 2012 12:03:01 GMT -8
So let's say Metro goes with the busway to the VA for the Sepulveda pass line. Not to get all Mirisch on everyone, but won't that make the Westwood station location kind of sub-optimal? Sure, Wilshire's busy, but it's really, really far from UCLA. More than that, there's so much gravity just generally north of Wilshire that a lone Westwood station on the region's border seems to really miss the target. And as much as I hate to say it, why is the "center of the center" standard not considered at all here when it's so understandably important just one stop east in Century City?
Of course, a Sepulveda pass line with a UCLA station and connection to the purple line at Wilshire would really take care of the whole mess.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on May 15, 2012 12:23:27 GMT -8
So let's say Metro goes with the busway to the VA for the Sepulveda pass line. Not to get all Mirisch on everyone, but won't that make the Westwood station location kind of sub-optimal? Sure, Wilshire's busy, but it's really, really far from UCLA. More than that, there's so much gravity just generally north of Wilshire that a lone Westwood station on the region's border seems to really miss the target. And as much as I hate to say it, why is the "center of the center" standard not considered at all here when it's so understandably important just one stop east in Century City? Of course, a Sepulveda pass line with a UCLA station and connection to the purple line at Wilshire would really take care of the whole mess. Yes, it would be a missed opportunity and I am very much for a Sepulveda line with a stop at UCLA if we can somehow afford it. Given that, Westwood Village including the office towers on Wilshire as well as the apartment community just south as well as businesses on Westwood Blvd. more than qualify for a station. Wilshire is like Century City in this area and it has tens of thousands of workers here. That is why this station is projected as so busy. Look at the 720 stop in Westwood. It is always absolutely packed. If you put a Purple Line station up on campus you miss all that. It will be great to have a station at UCLA eventually, but I think if I had to choose one location right now, it would be where the Purple Line is. People like Mirsch (who doesn't know what he is talking about and is just trying to criticize Metro because of the Beverly Hills situation) will say Metro is missing a key area like UCLA, but they underestimate ridership from office towers like those on Wilshire and in Century City of course.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on May 15, 2012 13:52:49 GMT -8
UCLA is not the only game in town in Westwood. The office towers on Westwood and the surrounding apartment community more than justify the choice of placing the station at Wilshire/Westwood -- not to mention there are issues with crossing the VA property if it is any farther north than that.
Mirischi is looking for a cheap excuse to criticize Metro.
|
|
|
Post by WhiteCity on May 15, 2012 14:38:59 GMT -8
there are issues with crossing the VA property if it is any farther north than that. Could you elaborate on those issues? I've heard mention of not being able to tunnel under a national cemetery, though that is somehow hard for me to believe. That would be an odd policy.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on May 15, 2012 14:56:31 GMT -8
UCLA is not the only game in town in Westwood. The office towers on Westwood and the surrounding apartment community more than justify the choice of placing the station at Wilshire/Westwood -- not to mention there are issues with crossing the VA property if it is any farther north than that. Mirischi is looking for a cheap excuse to criticize Metro. Mr. Mirisch and CenturyCitySubway.org (a paid PR firm on behalf of BHUSD), are spreading lies. First of all, having a station at UCLA instead of Wilshire/Westwood makes no sense given the proximity. It works well for a N-S line, but not E-W like the Purple Line. A university is in session 180 days a year with full students. Students mostly live in/around the university area. Now, office towers are occupied 270 days/year and people tend to live further away from work than students with school. Simple answer.
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on May 16, 2012 8:44:25 GMT -8
So who on this discussion board is going to be at the Tomorrow's Hearing at Metro HQ to speak in behalf of the Constellation Station and tunneling under BHHS is safe?
Send me a Private Message if you will be there.
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on May 16, 2012 11:33:10 GMT -8
Hmm? If these people show up in droves, I can picture a crescendo of normal tone anti-digging comments and opinions turning into a frenzied, stentorian anti-subway rally where they'll drown out anyone that says anything positive. The PR firm that BHUSD hired has done a great job of poking the hornets nest.
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on May 16, 2012 11:56:15 GMT -8
Hmm? If these people show up in droves, I can picture a crescendo of normal tone anti-digging comments and opinions turning into a frenzied, stentorian anti-subway rally where they'll drown out anyone that says anything positive. The PR firm that BHUSD hired has done a great job of poking the hornets nest. Actually its the ones who say something positive that drowns out the others contrary to their comments.
|
|
|
Post by John Ryan on May 17, 2012 14:48:32 GMT -8
Somewhat dry and technical testimony from my listening on and off for the last hour but I have not been able to focus because I am at work. Can anyone else provide an update?
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 18, 2012 7:36:42 GMT -8
I can't believe this hasn't been posted yet! This actually made the local news: Parody of BHHS Subway Video: The Hillfolks' Lament
|
|
|
Post by John Ryan on May 18, 2012 10:01:39 GMT -8
Beverly Hills threatens legal action over subway extension
May 17, 2012 | 10:30 pm A special hearing Thursday about the proposed route for the Westside Subway Extension was dominated by science, with geologists and engineers pointing to maps and the existence -- or lack thereof -- of earthquake faults and decrying the way Los Angeles County transportation researchers have gone about their work. But even amid the talk of boring samples and surface integrity, the message from Beverly Hills to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority was clear: Proceed as planned and tunnel underneath Beverly Hills High School for the subway extension and you will get sued. "Clearly, if we don't get a fair hearing and have our science [taken] into consideration, then we're going to have no choice," said Brian Goldberg, president of the Beverly Hills Unified School District board. "We believe there's alternatives that have not been fully explored yet." County transportation officials certified environmental documents for the entire $5.6-billion project last month. The plan calls for construction of nine miles of rail that will mostly run underneath Wilshire Boulevard. But officials could only formally approve the first 3.9 miles of the project because Beverly Hills city officials requested a hearing regarding a small portion of the line that would run underneath Beverly Hills High School. A few hundred people showed up to Thursday's hearing, which ran more than 3 1/2 hours and didn't leave enough time for members of the public to comment. They will be able to do so at the regularly scheduled Metro board meeting next week. The presentations given to board members were mostly from geologists, who often derided Metro's analyses and conclusions. At one point, geologist Eldon Gath said: "It's not science; it feels like it's paradigm-driven and opinion-driven, and maybe a bit of arrogance thrown in." Metro maintains that it is safe to tunnel under the school. There was no action taken at the hearing, but the Metro Board of Directors must make a determination on the evidence presented before approving further stages of the project. "They make a very good case, they do," said Los Angeles County Supervisor and Metro board member Michael D. Antonovich. He said the opposition shows that Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's attempts to "shove this down the throat of Beverly Hills" has not worked. Antonovich said he would be open to other alignments that do not run underneath the school and worried about getting caught in a costly legal battle. "If the alignment is not modified, then the district will have litigation. It will cost taxpayer dollars that can better be spent on transportation," he said. "It was a chance for Beverly Hills to put on their case; we listened, and we will evaluate their comments," said Metro board member Richard Katz, who added that there is a lot of evidence to show that tunneling under buildings, including schools, can be safe. As for a lawsuit, Katz said he's "hoping it doesn't come to that." latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/05/beverly-hills-high-school-subway-extension.html
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 18, 2012 10:16:25 GMT -8
Antonovich is up for reelection (for the last time) this year. Anyone in his district, now is your chance to vote this old nutsack out of office.
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on May 18, 2012 15:24:01 GMT -8
HAHAHAHAHAH! I'm mesmerized by that YouTube clip!
This is what I see happening: Metro will give in to Beverly Hills and do the re-routing demanded of them, then suddenly Beverly Hills is going to find something wrong with the plans for the Rodeo Station: the station won't be European enough. So Metro will give in again and license space in the mezzanine for a Starbucks and a news stand. Beverly Hills will demand a French café, an Italian pizzeria, a Belgian chocolate shop, and a BBC certified news stand, at which time Metro gets it, goes back to the drawing board, and re-routes it anywhere else.
|
|
|
Post by John Ryan on May 18, 2012 20:16:55 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on May 19, 2012 1:24:30 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on May 19, 2012 8:39:55 GMT -8
The question is: besides overbearing tourists and well off Beverly Hills/Bel Air residents, does anyone really shop on Rodeo? Why is Rodeo so important? I'd rather shop at Macy's, Ross, or Marshalls and I can find those anywhere now! Granted, Bell Gardens doesn't have a Macy's, but I have a choice of going to Downey or Montebello, or on a nice day, Macy's Plaza in DTLA (MTA bus 111 to the Blue Line) or Culver City (a one seat ride on MTA bus 110; and for $1.50 each way, it's the bargain ride of the year).
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on May 19, 2012 9:25:39 GMT -8
The only thing missing is train service to Palm Springs. We would spend more time out there if that was a viable option. Anybody know if thats even in the preliminary planning stages? Oh, I did the "like" on FB... RT
|
|
|
Post by Elson on May 19, 2012 13:45:30 GMT -8
The question is: besides overbearing tourists and well off Beverly Hills/Bel Air residents, does anyone really shop on Rodeo? Why is Rodeo so important? I'd rather shop at Macy's, Ross, or Marshalls and I can find those anywhere now! Granted, Bell Gardens doesn't have a Macy's, but I have a choice of going to Downey or Montebello, or on a nice day, Macy's Plaza in DTLA (MTA bus 111 to the Blue Line) or Culver City (a one seat ride on MTA bus 110; and for $1.50 each way, it's the bargain ride of the year). Rodeo is extremely important because it serves downtown Beverly Hills. It's walking distance to the Hilton, Little Santa Monica Blvd shops and restaurants, the BH City Hall, Library and new performing arts center, as well as other shops and businesses along Wilshire. The only other station in Beverly Hills, on Wilshire/La Cienega, is more on the outskirts of town, closer to the western edge of LA's Miracle Mile, and doesn't really serve BH proper. I do think the naming and location were intentional, and rightfully so, when a tourist looks at a map of the Metro and sees stations at "Hollywood/Vine," "Universal City," and one on Rodeo Drive, they know they can use the system to go to places. I'm hoping the Colorado/4th Expo Line station would be renamed "Santa Monica Beach" or "Santa Monica Pier" or something close to that.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on May 19, 2012 14:33:44 GMT -8
The question is: besides overbearing tourists and well off Beverly Hills/Bel Air residents, does anyone really shop on Rodeo? Why is Rodeo so important? I'd rather shop at Macy's, Ross, or Marshalls and I can find those anywhere now! Granted, Bell Gardens doesn't have a Macy's, but I have a choice of going to Downey or Montebello, or on a nice day, Macy's Plaza in DTLA (MTA bus 111 to the Blue Line) or Culver City (a one seat ride on MTA bus 110; and for $1.50 each way, it's the bargain ride of the year). No offense, but Bell Gardens and Downey shopping are not comparable to Rodeo. Nobody going to Stonewood Mall was deciding between that and Rodeo. Just like no one on Rodeo would probably ever consider stepping into Stonewood. Two completely different markets. Rodeo does attract wealthy shoppers from all over Southern California. It is a regional draw. They have a concentration of unique high end stores. Rodeo is not going to attract somebody trying to pick up a really cheap pair of socks and underwear, although there are more mainstream shops one block over on Beverly. Also, tourists do flock to Rodeo. Some just to check it out but others to shop. They are an important part if the economy and pay big sales taxes in many cases, which of course funds our transit through Measure R and Props A and C.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 19, 2012 15:55:23 GMT -8
No offense, but Bell Gardens and Downey shopping are not comparable to Rodeo. Nobody going to Stonewood Mall was deciding between that and Rodeo. Just like no one on Rodeo would probably ever consider stepping into Stonewood. Two completely different markets. Huh? He never suggested that the shopping areas were similar and in fact suggested otherwise. I think that his point was that aside from tourists, Rodeo is an unlikely destination for most Los Angeles shoppers. Especially those shoppers that would use public transportation.
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on May 19, 2012 16:04:21 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by masonite on May 19, 2012 16:17:52 GMT -8
No offense, but Bell Gardens and Downey shopping are not comparable to Rodeo. Nobody going to Stonewood Mall was deciding between that and Rodeo. Just like no one on Rodeo would probably ever consider stepping into Stonewood. Two completely different markets. Huh? He never suggested that the shopping areas were similar and in fact suggested otherwise. I think that his point was that aside from tourists, Rodeo is an unlikely destination for most Los Angeles shoppers. Especially those shoppers that would use public transportation. He did ask why anyone would shop there when people like him could go to the local mall like those in his area. I was trying to point that Rodeo is a large regional draw for some shoppers and not just tourists or BH residents. Just because Bell Gardens residents would not find reason to shop there does not mean residents from other places outside BH wouldn't as well. It is a good point about whether public transit would be utilized, but like I said Beverly has more mainstream stores, some of which are similar to the Grove, which many people on this forum thought the Purple Line should try to hit.
|
|
|
Post by ieko on May 19, 2012 16:59:02 GMT -8
Huh? He never suggested that the shopping areas were similar and in fact suggested otherwise. I think that his point was that aside from tourists, Rodeo is an unlikely destination for most Los Angeles shoppers. Especially those shoppers that would use public transportation. He did ask why anyone would shop there when people like him could go to the local mall like those in his area. I was trying to point that Rodeo is a large regional draw for some shoppers and not just tourists or BH residents. Just because Bell Gardens residents would not find reason to shop there does not mean residents from other places outside BH wouldn't as well. It is a good point about whether public transit would be utilized, but like I said Beverly has more mainstream stores, some of which are similar to the Grove, which many people on this forum thought the Purple Line should try to hit. Public transit to shopping districts like this are usually more for the workers and tourists, not local high end shoppers.
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on May 19, 2012 18:54:15 GMT -8
That's what I get for asking "does anyone really shop there?" OK, Masonite, you win. Please go reassure all those wealthy shoppers that you're standing up for that I shan't slight them again.
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on May 20, 2012 14:04:22 GMT -8
Rodeo station has high employment density. That's the main reason why station is proposed - the same reason why we have La Cienega station (not for Beverly Center) or Century City Station (not for Westfield Mall). Rodeo is a very busy 720 stop as is... even if no tourist ever take the subway, there is still several thousand jobs within 1/2 mile radius.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on May 20, 2012 15:05:08 GMT -8
For name-recognition purposes, Rodeo Drive definitely is the most easily recognizable street name in Beverly Hills.
and yes, I do think that it would be a tourist draw, or at least it would be attention grabbing. I can easily imagine some Japanese tourists seeing Rodeo Drive on the subway map in their guide to Los Angeles/ Hollywood.
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on May 20, 2012 15:55:58 GMT -8
For name-recognition purposes, Rodeo Drive definitely is the most easily recognizable street name in Beverly Hills. and yes, I do think that it would be a tourist draw, or at least it would be attention grabbing. I can easily imagine some Japanese tourists seeing Rodeo Drive on the subway map in their guide to Los Angeles/ Hollywood. I think it's a great PR move to have a stop there, and would likely be used quite a bit for people to take a picture and get back on the train (just like Pigalle in Paris). Once the line would be open, I guess nobody here would care so much about any boycott of Beverly Hills retailers anyway.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 21, 2012 9:00:17 GMT -8
News: City of BH has proposed three alternative routes to Constellation station. All of the proposed routes stay on Santa Monica Boulevard past Beverly Hills High, and then sharply curve down to Constellation @ Avenue Of The Stars. All of them have disadvantages, including increased risks from tunneling directly under skyscraper foundations. Still, this seems like a positive step. But I do want to know: (a) Are the proposed S-curves technically feasible? (b) Are the proposed routes earthquake-safe? (c) What risks are posed to tunneling under existing skyscrapers? (d) How much ride-time would the proposed routes add between stations? (e) How much would the proposed routes cost, compared to the approved option? Who would pay the difference? (f) What would be the impact of the (slight) relocation of the Constellation station westward? I would also like to know why Beverly Hills waited until the last-possible minute to propose what appears to be a rational solution. Probably they have realized how weak their legal case is. It will be interesting to hear what Metro staff and consulting engineers think about these proposals. I do think Metro has to take these proposals seriously.
|
|
|
Post by simonla on May 21, 2012 9:26:30 GMT -8
That's absolutely ridiculous. How is the city of Beverly Hills a transit planner? Why should the entire region wait years more for this project while Metro vets each proposal? There is already a safe and rational route picked (under BHHS)--just because they don't want it, doesn't mean it shouldn't move forward.
|
|